Symptomatic venous thromboembolism associated with peripherally inserted central catheters predicts a worse survival in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: results of a large cohort, propensity score-matched analysis

Biomarkers Associated with Thrombosis in Patients with Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The measurement and identification of plasma biomarkers can support the estimation of risk and diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) associated with the use of a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC).

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify the association between the levels of potential biomarkers that reflect the activation of the blood system, long-term vascular complications, inflammatory system, and the occurrence of PICC-related DVT.

METHODS

Seven electronic databases (Embase, Web of Science, Medline, Scopus, Cinahl, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ERIC) were searched to identify literature published until December 2022. Studies were required to report: (I) adult and pediatric patients, outpatient or admitted to clinical, surgical, or ICU with PICC; (II) patients with PICC-related DVT and patients without PICC-related DVT as a comparator; and (III) at least one biomarker available. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the quality of the studies. Study precision was evaluated by using a funnel plot for platelets level. We provided a narrative synthesis and meta-analysis of the findings on the biomarkers' outcomes of the studies. We pooled the results using random effects meta-analysis. The meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager software v5.4. This systematic review is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42018108871).

RESULTS

Of the 3564 studies identified (after duplication removal), 28 were included. PICC-related DVT was associated with higher D-dimers (0.37 μg/mL, 95% CI 0.02, 0.72; p = 0.04, I² = 92%; p for heterogeneity < 0.00001) and with higher platelets (8.76 × 10⁹/L, 95% CI 1.62, 15.91; p = 0.02, I² = 41%; p for heterogeneity = 0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

High levels of D-dimer and platelet were associated with DVT in patients with PICC. However, biomarkers such as APTT, fibrinogen, FDP, glucose, hemoglobin, glycated hemoglobin, INR, prothrombin time, prothrombin fragment 1.2, the thrombin-antithrombin complex, and WBC were not related to the development of DVT associated with PICC.

Venous thromboembolism associated with central venous catheters in patients with cancer: From pathophysiology to thromboprophylaxis, areas for future studies

Symptomatic catheter related thrombosis (CRT) occurs in 4%-8% of cancer patients. The mean incidence of CRT, detected either by echography or Doppler ranges between 12 and 14% with a high negative predictive value of about 95%, allowing the subsequent occurrence of CRT (symptomatic and asymptomatic) to be safely excluded. Despite its frequency and its medico-economic consequences, no thromboprophylaxis has been validated to date. In most patients, CRT occurs immediately after catheter insertion, most often within the first week and almost all within the first month after insertion. Meta analyses show a reduction of asymptomatic and symptomatic CRT incidence by about 55%-60% using either vitamin K antagonists or low molecular weight heparins without an increased risk of major bleeding. This pharmacological prophylaxis is only effective when started before the central venous catheter insertion at prophylactic doses and thereafter continued at subtherapeutic doses. Since no population at high risk of CRT has been identified, this review focuses on pathophysiology, epidemiology and clinical supportive data that could lead to a new CRT prophylaxis strategy.

Feasibility analysis of external application of Xiao-Shuan-San in preventing PICC-related thrombosis

PURPOSE

We aim to analyze the feasibility of external application of Xiao-Shuan-Santo prevent peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) -related thrombosis.

METHODS

A total of 218 patients with PICC catheterization were randomly divided into a control group (n = 103) and a treatment group (n = 115). Patients in the treatment group received additional external application of Xiao-Shuan-San. The changes of coagulation index, the incidence of PICC-related thrombosis and other complications, and the maximum blood flow rate (Vmax) of axillary vein were observed at 1 day before catheterization and 30 days after PICC.

RESULTS

At 30 days after PICC, the incidence of PICC-related thrombosis and other adverse events in the treatment group were obviously lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05), and the decreased Vmax value of axillary vein in the control group (11.75±1.91 cm/s) was more visible than that in the treatment group (14.63±3.03 cm/s), accompanied by a statistical significance (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

External application of Xiao-Shuan-San could reduce the incidence of PICC-related thrombosis and other complications.

Comparison of Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin vs. Docetaxel Plus Fluorouracil Plus Cisplatin Palliative Chemotherapy for Metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma

Objective: Our study aimed to compare the efficacy and toxicity of two chemotherapy regimens, gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GP) vs. docetaxel plus, fluorouracil plus cisplatin (TPF), in metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients.

Methods: We retrospectively enrolled metastatic NPC patients between July 2006 and December 2016 who were treated with TPF or GP palliative chemotherapy (PCT). The association between the PCT regimens and survival conditions was evaluated by log-rank tests and the Cox proportional hazards model. A cohort was created using propensity score matching with the ratio of 1:1 to clarify the results of the multivariable Cox regression analyses. Overall survival (OS) was the primary endpoint.

Results: Of 266 eligible patients, 186 and 80 patients, respectively, received TPF and GP regimen. No significant difference was demonstrated in the survival rate between the GP and TPF groups (3-year OS: 52.6 vs. 50.3%; P = 0.929). However, multivariable analysis suggested receiving GP as an independent protective factor (hazard ratio, 0.864; 95% confidence interval, 0.753–0.992; P = 0.042). In the matched cohort, treatment with GP was also associated with a significantly higher OS (3-year OS: 52.6 vs. 35.6%, P = 0.042). Subgroup analysis indicated that the superiority of GP reflected in patients with secondary metastases rather than primary metastases. The incidence of grade 3 to 4 treatment-related toxicity was more common in the TPF group than in the GP group.

Conclusion: Our study suggested that GP might be superior to TPF for metastatic NPC patients, especially those with secondary distant metastases. Further studies are necessary to validate our results.